Daniel Macis
Cristina Gena
ABSTRACT
Recently, it has been considering robotics to face world population aging. According to the WHO, in 2050 there will be about 2.1 billion people over 60 years old worldwide causing a persistent growing need of assistance and a shortage of manpower for delivering congruous assistance. Therefore, seniors’ QoL is continuously threatened. Socially Assistive Robotics proposes itself as a solution. To improve SARs acceptability, it is necessary to tailor the system's characteristics with respect to the target needs and issues through the analysis of previous and current studies in the HRI field. Through the examination of the state of the art of social robotics in elderly care, past case studies and paper research about SARs’ efficiency, it has been proposed two potential solution examples for two different scenarios, applying two different SARs: Pepper and Nao robots.
- N. B. dos Santos, R. Bavaresco, J. Tavares, G. D. O. Ramos, J. Barbosa. 2021. A systematic mapping study of robotics in human care. Robotics and Autonomous Systems.2021, n. 144Google Scholar
- T. Fong, I. Nourbakhsh, K. Dautenhahn. 2003. A Survey of Socially Interactive Robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems,2003, n. 42, 143-166.Google Scholar
- Olaronke, O. A. Ojerinde, R. Ikono. 2017. State Of The Art: A Study of Human-Robot Interaction in Healthcare. International Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic Business,2017, n. 3, 43-55.Google Scholar
- T. Huang, H.. Liu. 2019. Acceptability of Robots to Assist the Elderly by Future Designers: A Case of Guangdong Ocean University Industrial Design Students. Sustainability, 2019, 11, 15, 4139.Google Scholar
- N. Ezer, A. Fisk, W.A. Rogers. 2009. Attitudinal and Intentional Acceptance of Domestic Robots by Younger and Older Adults. Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Intelligent and Ubiquitous Interaction Environments, 5th International Conference, UAHCI 2009, Held as Part of HCI International 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19-24, 2009. Proceedings, Part IIGoogle Scholar
- I. Papadopoulos, C. Koulouglioti, S. Ali. 2018. Views of nurses and other health and social care workers on the use of assistive humanoid and animal-like robots in health and social care: a scoping review. Contemporary nurse, 54(4-5), 425–442.Google Scholar
- M. Heerink, B. Krose, B. Wielinga, V. Evers. 2008. Enjoyment intention to use and actual use of a conversational robot by elderly people. 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), 2008, pp. 113-119Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Coco, M. Kangasniemi, T. Rantanen. 2018. Care Personnel's Attitudes and Fears Toward Care Robots in Elderly Care: A Comparison of Data from the Care Personnel in Finland and Japan. Journal of Nursing Scholarship: an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing, 50(6), 634–644.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Di Dio, F. Manzi, G. Peretti, A, Cangelosi, P. L. Harris, D. Massaro, A. Marchetti. 2020. Shall I Trust You? From Child-Robot Interaction to Trusting Relationships. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 469.Google Scholar
- E. Broadbent, R. Q. Stafford, B.A. MacDonald. (2009). Acceptance of Healthcare Robots for the Older Population: Review and Future Directions. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1, 319-330, 2009.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. Fischer. 2011. How People Talk with Robots: Designing Dialog to Reduce User Uncertainty. Ai Magazine, 32, 31-38.Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. Bradwell, K. Edwards, R. Winnington, S. Thill, R. Jones. 2019. Companion robots for older people: Importance of user-centred design demonstrated through observations and focus groups comparing preferences of older people and roboticists. BMJ Open, 9(9), e032468, 2019.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. Allen,C. Bagnati, E. Dow, A. Friel, S. Ibrahim, H. June,N. Laten, V. Le, E. Manes, M. McCoy, J. McGow-Russell, M. Nuru, J. Payne, E. Roselaar, T. Sanders, J. Schwieterman, N. Scott, K. Stanton, K. Van Antwerp, S. Wang, L. Wilson, B.S. Duerstock. 2020. Report on the Use of Assistive Robotics to Aid Persons with Disabilities. Undergraduate Coursework. Paper 4, 2020.Google Scholar
- E. Broadbent, R. Tamagawa, A. Patience, B. Knock, N. Kerse, K. Day, B. A. MacDonald. 2012. Attitudes towards health-care robots in a retirement village. Australasian journal on ageing, n. 2, pp. 115-120, 2012.Google Scholar
- V. Sriram, C. Jenkinson, M. Peters. 2019. Informal carers' experience of assistive technology use in dementia care at home: a systematic review. BMC Geriatrics, 2019.Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. Lehmann, D. S. Syrdal, K. Dauthenhahn, G. J. Gelderblom, S. Bedaf, F. Amirabdollahian. 2013. What should a robot do for you? - Evaluating the needs of the elderly in the UK. 6th International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions (ACHI), 2013.Google Scholar
- P. Alves-Oliveira, S. Petisca, F. Correia, N. Maia, A. Paiva.Social Robots for Older Adults: Framework of Activities for Aging in Place with Robots. International Conference on Social Robotics, n. 9388, 2015, Paris.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. D. Carolis, V. Carofiglio, I. Grimaldi, N. Macchiarulo, G. Palestra, O. Pino.2020. Using the Pepper Robot in Cognitive Stimulation Therapy for People with Mild Cognitive Impairment and Mild Dementia. ACHI 2020: The Thirteenth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, 2020.Google Scholar
- M. R. Banks, L. M. Willoughby, W. A. Banks. 2008. Animal-assisted therapy and loneliness in nursing homes: Use of robotic versus living dogs. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, vol. 9, pp. 173-177, 2008.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Langer, R. Feingold-Polak, O. Mueller, P. Kellmeyer, S. Levy-Tzedek. 2019. Trust in socially assistive robots: Considerations for use in rehabilitation. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, vol. 104, pp. 231-239, 2019.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. Pu, W. Moyle, C. Jones, M. Todorovic. 2018. The Effectiveness of Social Robots for Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies. The Gerontologist, n. 59, pp. e37-e51, 2018.Google Scholar
- H. Robinson, B. A. MacDonald, N. Kerse, E. Broadbent. 2012. Suitability of healthcare robots for a dementia unit and suggested improvements. Suitability of healthcare robots for a dementia unit and suggested improvements, Elsevier, 2012, pp. 1-7.Google Scholar
- A. Sorrentino, G. Mancioppi, L. Coviello, F. Cavallo, L. Fiorini. 2021. Feasibility Study on the Role of Personality, Emotion, and Engagement in Socially Assistive Robotics: A Cognitive Assessment Scenario. Informatics, n. 8(2), 23, 2021.Google Scholar
- S. Cooper, A. D. Fava, C. Vivas, L. Marchionni, F. Ferro. 2020. ARI: the Social Assistive Robot and Companion. 29th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive (RO-MAN), 2020.Google Scholar
- N. Jøranson, I. Pedersen, A. M. M. Rokstad, C. Ihlebæk. 2015. Effects on symptoms of agitation and depression in persons with dementia participating in robot-assisted activity: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Dir Assoc, n. 16, pp. 867-873, 2015.Google Scholar
- K. Wada, T. Shibata, T. Saito, K. Sakamoto, K. Tanie. 2005. Psychological and social effects of one year robot assisted activity on elderly people at a health service facility for the aged. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International, Barcellona, 2005.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. Wada, T. Shibata, T. Saito, K. Sakamoto, K. Tanie. 2003. Relationship between interaction with the mental commit robot and change of stress reaction of the elderly. Proceedings 2003 IEEE International Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation, Kobe, 2003.Google Scholar
- A. Liang, I. Piroth, H. Robinson, B. MacDonald, M. Fisher, U. M. Nater, N. Skoluda, E. Broadbent. 2017. A pilot randomized trial of a companion robot for people with dementia living in the community. J Am Med Dir Assoc, n. 18, pp. 817-878, 2017.Google Scholar
- S. Petersen, S. Houston, H. Qin, C. Tague, J. Studley. 2017. The utilization of robotic pets in dementia care. J Alzheimers Dis, n. 55, pp. 569-574, 2017.Google Scholar
- P. Buono, G. Castellano, B. D. Carolis, N. Macchiarulo. 2020. Social Assistive Robots in Elderly Care: Exploring the role of Empathy. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Empowering People in Dealing with Internet of Things Ecosystems co-located with International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI 2020), 2020.Google Scholar
- I. Olaronke, R. Ikono, J. Olaleke. 2017. A Framework for Avoiding Uncanny Valley in Healthcare. International journal of biosciences, health technology and management, n. 7, pp. 1-10, 2017.Google Scholar
- M. E. Pollack, L. Brown, D. Colbry, C. Orosz, B. Peintner, S. Ramakrishnan, S. Engberg, J. T. Matthews, J. Dunbar-Jacob, C. E. McCarthy, S. Thrun, M. Montemerlo, J. Pineau, N. Roy. 2002. Pearl: A Mobile Robotic Assistant for the Elderly. AAAI Technical Report WS-02-02, 2002.Google Scholar
- J. Pineau, M. Montemerlo, M. Pollack, N. Roy, S. Thrun. 2002. Towards Robotic Assistants in Nursing Homes: Challenges and Results. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, n. 42 pp. 271-281, 2002.Google Scholar
- V. Lawrence, J. Fossey, C. Ballard, E. Moniz-Cook, J. Murray. 2012. Improving quality of life for people with dementia in care homes: making psychosocial interventions work,» The British Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 201, n. 5, pp. 344-351, 2012.Google Scholar
- J. Li, W. Y. G. Louie, S. Mohamed, F. Despond, G. Nejat. 2016. A user-study with Tangy the Bingo facilitating robot and long-term care residents. 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Robotics and Intelligent Sensors (IRIS), 2016.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. Khosla, K. Nguyen, M. T. Chu. 2016. Socially Assistive Robot Enabled Personalised Care for People with Dementia in Australian Private Homes. 25TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT, Poland, 2016.Google Scholar
- C. Huisman, H. Kort. 2019 Two-Year Use of Care Robot Zora in Dutch Nursing Homes: An Evaluation Study,» Healthcare, vol. 1, n. 7, 2019.Google Scholar
- S. Robotics - Choregraphe. Choregraphe download [Online]. Available: https://www.softbankrobotics.com/emea/en/support/nao-6/downloads-softwares. [Consulted the day 04 23 2022].Google Scholar
- S. G. Hofmann, A. T. Sawyer, A. A. Witt, D. Oh. 2010. Mindfulness for depression and anxiety. A metaanalisys. Journal Consulting Clinical Psychology, vol. 2, n. 78, p. 169–183, 2010.Google Scholar
- A. Shamekhi, T. Bickmore. 2018. Breathe deep: A breath-sensitive interactive meditation coach. PervasiveHealth '18: Proceedings of the 12th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, 2018.Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Pirotta - Laura Pirotta [Online]. Available: https://www.laurapirotta.com/. [Consulted the day 02 12 2022].Google Scholar
- Meditopia - Meditopia. Ritrova la serenità e migliora il tuo benessere [Online]. Available: https://meditopia.com/it. [Consulted the day 02 12 2022].Google Scholar
- Serenity - Serenity. Meditazioni guidate per tutti gli aspetti della vita [Online]. Available: https://it.serenitymeditations.co.uk/. [Consulted the day 02 12 2022].Google Scholar
- T. Slips - Time Slips [Online]. Available: http://www.timeslips.org. [Consulted the day 04 23 2022].Google Scholar
- R. Damiano, C. Gena, A. Maieli, C. Mattutino, A. Mazzei, E. Miraglio, G. Ricciardello. 2022. UX Personas for Defining Robot's Character and Personality. IUI Workshops 2022, pp. 213-213, 2022.Google Scholar
- F. Carros, J. Meurer, D. Löffler, D. Unbehaun, S. Matthies, I. Koch, R. Wieching, D. Randall, M. Hassenzahl, V. Wulf. 2020. Exploring Human-Robot Interaction with the Elderly: Results from a Ten-Week Case Study in a Care Home. CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2020.Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Manca, F. Paternò, C. Santoro, E. Zedda, C. Braschi, R. Franco, A. Sale. 2020. The Impact of serious games with humanoid robots on mild cognitive impairment older adults. International Journal of Human-Computer-Studies, 2020.Google Scholar
- O. Pino, G. Palestra, R. Trevino, B. D. Carolis. 2020. The humanoid robot NAO as trainer in a memory program for elderly people with Mild Cognitive Impairment. International Journal of Social Robotics, pp. 21-33, 2020.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. Palestra, O. Pino. 2020. Detecting emotions during a memory training assisted by a social robot for individuals with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). Multimedia Tools and Applications , p. 35829–35844, 2020.Google Scholar
- V. Cietto, C. Gena, I. Lombardi, C. Mattutino and C. Vaudano, "Co-designing with kids an educational robot," 2018 IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts (ARSO), 2018, pp. 139-140, doi: 10.1109/ARSO.2018.8625810.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cristina Gena, Federica Cena, Claudio Mattutino, Marco Botta: Cloud-based User Modeling for Social Robots: A First Attempt (short paper). cAESAR 2020: 1-6Google Scholar
- Anthony Jameson, Silvia Gabrielli, Per Ola Kristensson, Katharina Reinecke, Federica Cena, Cristina Gena, and Fabiana Vernero. 2011. How can we support users' preferential choice? In CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI EA '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 409–418. https://doi.org/10.1145/1979742.1979620Google ScholarDigital Library
Recommendations
Care robots and the future of ICT-mediated elderly care: a response to doom scenarios
The discussion about robots in elderly care is populated by doom scenarios about a totally dehumanized care system in which elderly people are taken care of by machines. Such scenarios are helpful as they attend us to what we think is important with ...
Improving the Quality of Life of People with Dementia through the Use of Socially Assistive Robots
AT-EQUAL '09: Proceedings of the 2009 Advanced Technologies for Enhanced Quality of LifeIn less than 25 years, 37 million people are expected to have dementia and/or Alzheimer’s disease. This significant figure is a result of several factors, including increasing life expectancy and an ageing population in developing countries. Alzheimer’s ...
Machines as a Source of Consolation: Robot Responsiveness Increases Human Approach Behavior and Desire for Companionship
HRI '16: The Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot InteractionResponsiveness to one's bids for proximity in times of need is a linchpin of human interaction. Thus, the ability to be perceived as responsive has design implications for socially assistive robots. We report on a large-scale experimental laboratory ...
Comments